Scully v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
840 F.2d 478 · 1988
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 2019
6 federal appellate ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 165 · 26 U.S.C. § 267
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Burnet v. Harmel · Higgins v. Smith · United States v. New York Telephone Co.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We have reviewed the record and can find no significant evidence of any actual separation. As the trustees admit, the purpose of the sale was to keep all the real estate in the family. The land owned by the trusts was contiguous and used a unified drainage system. There is no evidence that the tenants on the land were aware of the separate ownership by the trusts. The trustees of the trusts are the same. The trustees are brothers. All of the current beneficiaries of the trusts are the children of the trustees ... The remainder beneficiaries of the trusts are the descendants ... Most important, as the trustees admit, the purpose of the sale was to keep all of the real estate in the family and to permit the trustees to operate the land in both sets of trusts as a single, integrated economic entity. This reshuffling of assets permitted the trustees to achieve this purpose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Placid Oil Co.“Only a bona fide loss is allowable. Substance and not mere form shall govern in determining a deductible loss.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.